Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 21 2022

Consensual review edit

File:Forst_an_der_Weinstraße_Mariengartenweg_001_2022_03_24.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Bee (Apiformes) on an almond blossom (Prunus dulcis) in the Palatinate Forest Nature Park
    --F. Riedelio 10:07, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Beautiful image and good quality -- Spurzem 15:47, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment Agreed. Can the species or at least genus of the bee be identified? -- Ikan Kekek 21:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
    •   Answered Unfortunately, I am not a biologist and therefore can not determine the species of the bee. --F. Riedelio 12:51, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Question What happened to the status of this nomination? Didn't Spurzem change it to "Promoted"? I didn't change the status. Did you inadvertently do so, F. Riedelio? -- Ikan Kekek 21:02, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
    •   Answered It is possible that this happened accidentally during the answering process. --F. Riedelio 09:52, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for now, because I think QI requires that the genus at least of a subject of a photo be identified, but I could be wrong. Let's have a wider discussion. -- Ikan Kekek 19:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality, and the species of bee is now identified. -- Ikan Kekek 09:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose →   Promoted   --Peulle 08:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Alpina_B7_(F02)_1X7A0241.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination: Alpina B7 (F02) at Retro Classics Stuttgart 2021.--Alexander-93 19:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Review
  •   Support Good quality. --Virtual-Pano 19:57, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose. With this reflexion in the windschield it is no QI for me. Please discuss. --Spurzem 21:01, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Spurzem. --aismallard 01:08, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --aismallard 01:08, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Trier_Predigerstraße_(NO).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination: Predigerstraße in Trier. --Palauenc05 08:29, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Review
  •   Oppose Insufficient quality: exposure problems. --Peulle 11:04, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment To be explained. Other opinions, please. --Palauenc05 11:28, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support It's not a beautiful street but a good photo for me. -- Spurzem 15:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --Steindy 16:23, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle. Colour channel clipping. Also probably slight barrel distortion. --Smial 23:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Peulle and Steindy. Image quality is insufficient for QI. --aismallard 01:06, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --aismallard 01:06, 21 May 2022 (UTC)